Fantasy Beat

Scoresheet - A-Rod or Stephen Drew?

the archives are now free.

All Baseball Prospectus Premium and Fantasy articles more than a year old are now free as a thank you to the entire Internet for making our work possible.

Not a subscriber? Get exclusive content like this delivered hot to your inbox every weekday. Click here for more information on Baseball Prospectus subscriptions or use the buttons to the right to subscribe and get instant access to the best baseball content on the web.

I do try to be wise about my fantasy gaming, especially Scoresheet Baseball. And BP Kings has presented an interesting case of at least two smart people questioning a decision I recently made. With the draft for that league beginning today, and drafts everywhere beginning this week or in the ensuing two weeks, the question makes an interesting touchpoint for evaluating players in a context such as Scoresheet keeper leagues, where a significant portion of talent can be retained from year to year, and player salaries are not an issue. Anyway, here's what unfolded:

In the recent redistribution draft, I traded for the fourth pick and took.... Stephen Drew.

These are smart people–Sky doesn't have the Scoresheet experience, but clearly knows baseball. And I have no doubt that the forum poster would indeed do quite well in the 'Kings league, based on his other posts. So, what was I thinking? Is there a lesson to be learned here, other than that I could have possibly made a profit by trading down a pick (with Sky) and having both of us take the same players anyway?

Looking first at next-season (2011) value, it's important to remember that WARP is not fully correlated to Scoresheet value; so as a proxy, a run estimator based on rate stats will be used, with the offensive stats adjusted for Scoresheet defensive range compared to average (5.5 OPS points per .01 defensive range). All 250-plus PA shortstops and third basemen are listed, ordered by R/G, not +wins:

The above AVG', OBP', and SLG' are the adjusted values for batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage modified by defensive range away from average (4.76 at shortstop and 2.65 at third base). The first thing that jumps out is that A-Rod is indeed projected to be a high-impact player in 2011, fully 3.1 wins (using a crude 10 runs/win ratio) above “Scoresheet replacement” level! PECOTA shares some of Marc Normandin's optimism that A-Rod's hip is back, and–obviously–that his ballpark will help a ton. Stephen Drew gets a slight wins bump (compared to runs per game) for being projected at 650 plate appearances, compared to 600 for A-Rod.

In his blog post Wednesday, Sky tersely dismisses any position player value more than five years in the future. And, frankly, that is very wise advice which I will heartily reiterate here. One could argue convincingly that five years is more far-looking than necessary for most fantasy contexts, but it's a good enough balance to be a functional guideline. So, that leaves the Rodriguez versus Drew debate hinging on the answers to two big questions:

How much time-value do you give “wins”? In other words, if Drew can be expected to post +2.3 win seasons for the next three years, how do the +2.3 wins in 2012 and 2013 compare to those in 2011? Combining the cascading uncertainty of subsequent seasons with the fact that players doing well in the present season can usually be traded to good benefit, a factor of 10 percent depreciation per year has always seemed to work when I've built teams in the past. In cases like the one I'm in for the 'Kings league, I tend to be more willing to call it almost 0 percent for the first year, but 10 percent thereafter.

Will Drew be able to make up the -0.8 wins he's giving up in 2011 in the following four years? Drew's ages will be 28-32, while Rodriguez's will be 35-39 over the five-year span.

To be honest, given that A-Rod is one of the best players in the history of the game, the prospects do seem pretty grim for Stephen Drew to make up the projected win deficit he's expected to accrue in 2011; it would almost require that Rodriguez's physical condition deteriorate quicker than expected. And this is a good reminder that great older players can still retain a ton of value.

So, I was wrong? Well, yes, but.....

Even in breaking down the values as shown, many factors suggest that this move wasn't the complete waste of assets it appears on the surface:

I have Ryan Zimmerman. And so far, the best trade offers have been for about 60 percent of his value.

Stephen Drew hits right-handed pitching hard. As can be seen from the chart, his defense-adjusted R/G against righties is as high as everyone besides Troy Tulowitzki and Hanley Ramirez, and far ahead of the fifth guy on the list (Alexei Ramirez). Since platoon splits are locked in before the season, and active rosters aren't limited to 25 players (as in MLB), it will always be easier to find players who hit lefty pitching better, so Drew's weakness that way is less significant than it would be in real life.

The team is bad this year, and older players have reduced trade value in the 'Kings league. So, the notional (projected) 0.8 wins I'm losing aren't going to matter much, and my impression was that it would be difficult to get full 2012 value for A-Rod, though maybe that was an overreaction on my part.

Sure, A-Rod looked good at the end of the year, but that was a serious hip injury he sustained. If I'm playing for 2012 and beyond, Drew seemed safer, even though he misses some games every year.

I admit to making the trade for the distribution pick on a whim, since I had far more prospects than I could use or keep, and I liked the offer I received. So, it's a little less embarrassing to admit that the choice wasn't maximally efficient, and I am glad to have Drew, and feel that he's somewhat underrated as a Scoresheet commodity as long as he stays in hitter-friendly Arizona. And, really, having players you like is part of the fun of these games, though winning is always fun.

Feel free to ask draft questions in the comments here, as I'm much more prepared for the 2011 Scoresheet season now than when the dispersal draft took place. And follow along with the 'Kings draft, which kicks off tonight at 7:25 PM ET.

I understand that WARP is not correlated to Scoresheet value, but it accounts for total defense (range and errors), while your run estimator only adjusts for range. Is there something you do besides review a players error history to consider the effect that errors could have on future value?

I am also interested in the inner-workings of your run estimator. You probably don't want to share too much, like converting from OBP' and SLG' to R/G, but I don't see what R/G is. It is too big for Runs per Game and it is too small to be Runs per Week. I can see that you multiply by 17 to get total runs. I must be missing something.

I considered getting into errors made, but I don't know any better way to estimate those than past experience, as you suggest.

If the R/G values seem high, it's probably due to the average defensive values above being higher than average. I just used a rough approximation of RC/27 based on rate stats only (so SB aren't credited either, though those are worth less in Scoresheet, and neither player in question here had enough to worry about). I should have added in SB-runs after multiplying by 17. It was recently posted on the Scoresheet forums that: "Craswell's Scoresheet weights were +.10 and -.18" ... and those values seem consistent with my Scoresheet experience.

Since we get to read about the iterations of Scoresheet leagues during the year, is there any chance we can get the same commentary from a writer who plays Strat-O-Matic? I love the details, but would love a "classic" viewpoint as well. After all, this is the 50th anniversary of the great game.

Feel free to drop Strat-O-Matic related questions here. I've played that game for much longer than I've played Scoresheet, and there are other Strat-O-Matic experts at BP who will be happy to chime in.

Since it's a simulation based on previous years, it's sort of two steps removed from "fantasy", which is dependent (almost) entirely on current-season performance.

I'd lean slightly toward Daniel Hudson, while acknowledging the risk is higher as his true skill level is still up for debate. I think he has higher upside, and while Arizona's defense isn't great, Milwaukee took MLB's 2nd-worst DER and replaced Alcides Escobar with Yuniesky Betancourt. Those balls which roll through the infield in Milwaukee? They count the same as line shots for Scoresheet purposes. At least the outfield is decent in Milwaukee, which should help Marcum.

As a tiebreaker, I would consider Marcum's health problems in 2009 a negative. I'd still like to have him, but would rather have Hudson.

I tend to think that almost any player's range can be masked in one way or another in Scoresheet: by DH'ing him if possible; by fielding superior defenders at other positions to balance out the overall team defense; if he's an IF, by playing him out of position at 1B.

I obviously get that in player comparisons, defense is a key factor, but there are a lot of other factors in play. For instance, if you were to bat ARod 9th, the correlative defensive effect on his OPS would be different than if you batted him first.

Yeah, that's a typo on shortstop range. Will try to get that fixed ASAP, thanks for pointing it out. It should indeed read 4.75.

Lineup positional context is indeed important... For Strat-O-Matic listings, I look at 3 different values for each player - one based on leadoff PA, one based on #5 PA, and one based on #9 PA. Defense has more impact in SOM, though. Except for the extreme players, range can most definitely be masked, as you note. The two guys under discussion here are pretty close to average, however.

Any, yep, I did say that I probably should have taken A-Rod instead. Live and learn. I'm not unhappy to have Drew, but A-Rod would have been better.